Missing the Mark Big-Time
After talking to a number of residents about last week’s posting regarding former IRB City Attorney Andy Salzman, I realized I missed the mark. Evidently, I must have conveyed the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I was trying to say. Hey…it happens.
Those I spoke with thought my comments were intended as criticism of Salzman when they were meant as precisely the opposite. So this posting is a bit of a rewind in the interest of clarification.
What I tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to emphasize is that Redington Beach, where Salzman is currently the City Attorney, has decided to consider “other” proposals for legal services. Mentioned was the fact that they overshot their legal budget by $3,000. Think twice Redington Beach! Compared to IRB’s overspending in this category since replacing Salzman, your little $3K is a mere pittance.
In fact, some have conjectured that IRB may well exceed the budgeted amount for legal expenses by an amount equal to Redington Beach’s ENTIRE BUDGET for the year…which, in retrospect, makes Andy Salzman a very good deal.
The truth is that we, as citizens, have not been able to get a handle on the total YTD legal expenses in IRB. And it’s not for lack of trying. A public records request made about six months ago for copies of legal invoices associated with the Whitehurst litigation resulted in being asked to wait until the current City Attorney, Salzman’s replacement, had an opportunity to review the bills. Nothing more has been heard on the subject since. No doubt the Whitehurst invoice request fell into the ever-deepening chasm of unanswered public records requests from numerous IRB citizens.
Public records law says that if attorney bills contain items that are exempt because they reflect a legal conclusion, strategy, theory, etc. only that portion of the information can be withheld. Hours worked and the hourly fees do not fall within the scope of the exemption. Unfortunately, the only means a citizen has of compelling public info to which they are entitled but have been refused access to is to file suit…incurring even more legal fees for the city.
Similar “dancing” resulted around a similar question about whether or not the City’s insurance had kicked in with regard to the Grieshaber case or whether the City was still picking up the tab using City funds.
Legal expenses seem to be the topic of conversation in a few other beach communities, too. Last Sunday’s Neighborhood Times featured articles about St. Pete Beach’s struggle under the weight of attorney’s fees and about Madeira Beach paying a hefty price tag to reimburse a former commissioner who was unsuccessfully sued for defamation.
When I asked fellow bloggers to impart advice to Redington Beach regarding their request for proposals for city attorneys, I expected a good many of you to warn them to be very cautious when replacing Salzman because his type of experience and integrity is very tough to come by…especially at a reasonable price. I half expected someone to say that IRB unfairly showed Salzman the door because he refused to tell the commission what they wanted to hear. I thought someone might pipe up and offer the following advice to Redington…”Caution guys: the legal grass is not always greener.”
In 20-20 hindsight, do you feel the city was well served by replacing Mr. Salzman as our City Attorney or would you welcome him back tomorrow if given the opportunity?
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
(Note: If you'd like to comment on this posting, simply click on the "Comments" link at the bottom of the article and follow the prompts. You may comment anonymously if you'd like. Or, you can always e-mail your comments to irbeheard@cmdinc.net and we'll post them for you!)
After talking to a number of residents about last week’s posting regarding former IRB City Attorney Andy Salzman, I realized I missed the mark. Evidently, I must have conveyed the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I was trying to say. Hey…it happens.
Those I spoke with thought my comments were intended as criticism of Salzman when they were meant as precisely the opposite. So this posting is a bit of a rewind in the interest of clarification.
What I tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to emphasize is that Redington Beach, where Salzman is currently the City Attorney, has decided to consider “other” proposals for legal services. Mentioned was the fact that they overshot their legal budget by $3,000. Think twice Redington Beach! Compared to IRB’s overspending in this category since replacing Salzman, your little $3K is a mere pittance.
In fact, some have conjectured that IRB may well exceed the budgeted amount for legal expenses by an amount equal to Redington Beach’s ENTIRE BUDGET for the year…which, in retrospect, makes Andy Salzman a very good deal.
The truth is that we, as citizens, have not been able to get a handle on the total YTD legal expenses in IRB. And it’s not for lack of trying. A public records request made about six months ago for copies of legal invoices associated with the Whitehurst litigation resulted in being asked to wait until the current City Attorney, Salzman’s replacement, had an opportunity to review the bills. Nothing more has been heard on the subject since. No doubt the Whitehurst invoice request fell into the ever-deepening chasm of unanswered public records requests from numerous IRB citizens.
Public records law says that if attorney bills contain items that are exempt because they reflect a legal conclusion, strategy, theory, etc. only that portion of the information can be withheld. Hours worked and the hourly fees do not fall within the scope of the exemption. Unfortunately, the only means a citizen has of compelling public info to which they are entitled but have been refused access to is to file suit…incurring even more legal fees for the city.
Similar “dancing” resulted around a similar question about whether or not the City’s insurance had kicked in with regard to the Grieshaber case or whether the City was still picking up the tab using City funds.
Legal expenses seem to be the topic of conversation in a few other beach communities, too. Last Sunday’s Neighborhood Times featured articles about St. Pete Beach’s struggle under the weight of attorney’s fees and about Madeira Beach paying a hefty price tag to reimburse a former commissioner who was unsuccessfully sued for defamation.
When I asked fellow bloggers to impart advice to Redington Beach regarding their request for proposals for city attorneys, I expected a good many of you to warn them to be very cautious when replacing Salzman because his type of experience and integrity is very tough to come by…especially at a reasonable price. I half expected someone to say that IRB unfairly showed Salzman the door because he refused to tell the commission what they wanted to hear. I thought someone might pipe up and offer the following advice to Redington…”Caution guys: the legal grass is not always greener.”
In 20-20 hindsight, do you feel the city was well served by replacing Mr. Salzman as our City Attorney or would you welcome him back tomorrow if given the opportunity?
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
(Note: If you'd like to comment on this posting, simply click on the "Comments" link at the bottom of the article and follow the prompts. You may comment anonymously if you'd like. Or, you can always e-mail your comments to irbeheard@cmdinc.net and we'll post them for you!)
11 comments:
Once again, we can thank Jose Coppen for the mess we're in. He, along with his pen pal Leo went after Andy. Dumb and Dumber joined in. These people are responsible and should be held accountable for the additional cost.
Andy did a very good job as City Attorney for IRB. The previous contributor hit the nail on the head with his assessment.
IRB has been plagued with negative personal politics for the last 2.5 years. Too many personal agendas, vendettas, gotcha politics by those in office and in high places amongst the friends and a2000.
Bingo Boingo Bongo, you all are correct. Andy was a FRIEND to IRB! This new DOLT cares only about her billable hours, she is no friend to the citizens of IRB. If you dont believe me just attend a meeting and ask her a question. Our city has imploded, we cannot get answers and when we ask a question we get charged for it.
Negative personal politics have been part of IRB as long as there has been an IRB. Trust me, you will be much happier if you just accept what you can't change.
This crowd is much worse now that they have power in the form of seats on the commission. In the past we had personal politics without elitism. The only thing that saves irb is their incompetence.
We cannot afford to have Wollin up there for another two years, someone needs to oppose her!
Victor Wood, based on an interview by his closest friend Leo, has said he will not run. We just dodged a bullet there!
What about all of you loud mouth Yowlers? Any of you going to run, or will you just continue to complain about anything and everything, never offering anything constructive? Terry would eat anyone of you alive in an election. Care to find out chickens?
If you think this is bad, you weren't around during the "concerned citizens" reign of terror! There was some serious nasty!
I would take Victor over Terry any day!
Wood is Good 4 IRB.
Post a Comment